Result of Training Module: Fishbone Diagrams in Root Cause Analysis

1
Result of Training Module Fishbone Diagrams in
Root Cause Analysis

• Dan Gilbert
• Training Specialist

2
Instructional Design Model - ADDIE
Analysis Needs assessment Task inventories Determi
ne performance gaps Task analysis
Design Create learning objectives Create
performance tests Establish baseline SKAs Create
course outline
Evaluation Reaction Learning (knowledge) Behavior
(transfer) Results
Development Diagram activities to assist
learners Create materials or courseware Determine
technology Determine setting and style
Implementation Prepare to deliver
training Administer training (teach/facilitate) Cr
eate environment for learning
3
Assessment
4
Needs Assessment February 16, 2007
5
Needs Assessment (cont.)
6
Needs Assessment (cont.)
7
Design
8
DesignLearning Objectives

• The participant will discuss the advantages of
  using the fishbone (Ishikawa) diagram to identify
  possible root causes of recurring problems in a
  workplace process.
• The participant will develop keywords for use as
  main labels in the diagram.
• The participant will demonstrate brainstorming
  and multivoting techniques to prioritize possible
  root causes of recurring problems.
• The participant will draw a properly labeled
  Fishbone Diagram showing brainstormed diagram of
  possible root causes of recurring problems.
• The participant will identify sources of data to
  be collected to verify the assumptions of the
  root cause analysis.

9
DesignCourse Outline

• A. Pre-test
• B. Background of Fishbone Diagram
• 1. Ishikawa or Cause-and-Effect Diagram
• 2. Problem identification and clarification
• 3. Identify key data to collect
• 4. Idea generation general? specific
• 5. Reaching a consensus using the fishbone
  diagram
• C. Directions for Use
• 1. Draw spine and main labels (bones)
• 2. Possible keywords for main labels
• a. Procedures, materials, measurements,
  equipment, and processes
• b. Issues with using people as main label
• 3. Brainstorm possible root causes of problems
• 4. Multi-vote to reach consensus and prioritize
• 5. Collect data to verify assumptions of root
  causes

• D. Experiential Exercise
• 1. Use group case provided by the trainer to
• a. Draw fishbone diagram of possible root
  causes of problems
• b. Create main labels (bones) with appropriate
  keywords
• c. Brainstorm and multi-vote to identify and
  prioritize root causes
• d. Identify sources of data to be collected
• 2. Group presentation of fishbone diagram and
  data to be collected
• 3. Group Q A session with audience
• Course Wrap-Up
• Course Q A
• Post-test

10
Development
11
DevelopmentCourseware

• 1. Ishikawa or Cause-and-Effect Diagram
• 2. Problem identification and clarification
• 3. Identify key data to collect
• 4. Idea generation general ? specific
• 5. Reaching a consensus using the fishbone
  diagram
• 6. Suitable for individuals and teams
• 7. Non-supervisory staff and management can use
  the Fishbone Diagram

12
CoursewareDirections for Use

• 1. Draw spine and main labels (bones)
• 2. Possible keywords for main labels
• The four Ms Methods, Machines, Materials,
  Manpower
• Other labels Procedures, measurements,
  equipment, and processes
• What some researchers have said about using
  people or manpower as a label
• 3. Brainstorm possible root causes of problems
• 4. Multi-vote to reach consensus and prioritize
• 5. Collect data to verify assumptions of root
  causes

13
CoursewareExperiential Exercise

• 1. Use group case provided by the trainer to
• a. Draw fishbone diagram of possible root causes
  of problems
• b. Create main labels (bones) with appropriate
  keywords
• c. Brainstorm and multi-vote to identify and
  prioritize root causes
• d. Identify sources of data to be collected

14
CoursewareExperiential Exercise (cont.)

• 2. Group presentation of fishbone diagram and
  data to be collected
• 3. Group Q A session with audience

15
CoursewareExperiential Exercise (cont.)
16
CoursewarePost-Test
17
Implementation
18
Implementation

• March 21, 2007
• 1100 a.m.
• Twelve participants
• Good participation
• Asked questions and discussed implications
• Fulfilled learning objectives

19
Evaluation
20
EvaluationKnowledge
Pretest/Posttest
21
EvaluationKnowledge
22
EvaluationReaction
23
Q A